If Google is so worried about security then it should implement its own proprietary software. Wouldn't Google implement its own Chrome OS in beta form for its own company?

Really?!?! You are suggesting that Google should base the day to day operations of it's empire on an OS that isn't even out of beta yet?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smallwheels

Even if it weren't totally ready for the public it could let its employees have some basic functionality with the Chrome OS.

If it isn't ready for 'the public' then it isn't ready to run a billon dollar corporation with.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smallwheels

What does this say about Chrome OS if it is true? It says Chrome OS can't do regular business computing.

No it doesn't say anything like that... ALL it says is Chrome is still in BETA and anyone moving forward the idea that a company can be effectively run using a BETA OS is someone looking to get fired. HECK... Many large corporations wait YEARS after Microsoft release a new OS before they even THINK about migrating to it. In fact Microsoft usually has to put a gun to their head before they make an OS migration. Ever wonder WHY MS makes this grand announcements about them OFFICIALLY dropping support for some OLD version of Windows? Its to FORCE companies to UPGRADE to SOMETHING. While many companies IT groups don't RUSH to upgrade their OS they also don't want to be the people responsible for 'some catastrophic problem' that MS will NOT issue a fix for due to the fact that MS dropped support for that OS 6 months ago so this game of 'upgrade when we HAVE to' rolls on..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smallwheels

What specialized tasks do the Google business people do that requires OS X that can't be done with Chrome OS? I'm curious.

Nothing that comes to mind... and ONCE Chrome is a stable and fully field tested OS then Google will likely discuss migration plans THEN. Unfortunately, there LOTS of months before that will happen and short of closing up shop Google MUST have a stable environment to run their business on.

Unlike us geeks and home users... Businesses can't say... Well you know... if we wait 10 months we can probably get all of this stuff cheaper AND Chrome might be ready too! When a business NEEDS computers they have to buy them... no waiting till black friday sales or newegg discount codes.. When they need em they just go out and buy them.. in Googles case A LOT of them.

Also remember unlike us geeks who think of buying a computer as a investment Google just like every other big corporation knows they are nothing more than tools... The tool breaks and the repair is HALF (or less) than the cost of a new tool they fix them... The cost is more than half the cost they throw the sucker out and get a new one.

Google is NOT switching everyone to Macs running OSX. They have always had an option of which OS to use, and they are now dropping the Windows option. Employees now will have the choice of OSX, LINUX, or ChromeOS. I would also bet Windows developers will haver permission to run Windowes machines. No half qualified CIO is stupid enough to deny that when there is a legitimate case that outweighs the risks. I would not count on OSX becoming the dominant platform in Google. I am sure Chrome and Android will have a good chunk of the internal marketshare, if for no other reason, it would be a politicaaly smart choice for emplyees to make.

Chrome and Android are entirely unsuitable for development work. Yes, there will be people running Chrome and Android for testing (just like for Windows) but developers aren't going to be sitting there at the Googleplex coding away on Chrome or Android. They'll be using Linux or Mac OS for development work. Think about it. Would you use an iPad (being generous to Android) or a web browser (Chrome) as your primary coding environment? I certainly would not.

The implication is very direct: they are phasing out Windows. For you to imply that this means EVERY copy of Windows, including those needed by developers is silly. For MS or Apple to say are a Windows or Mac only company, respectively, doesn't mean they don't also use the other's SW for testing purposes and other things.

The article doesn't state that ALL Windows PCs will be removed. Do you think that MS employees use Windows to develop for the Mac? Of course not, but company-wide they use Windows.

Yeah there's plenty of departments that could run Mac. Everyone from accounting to graphic design could use a mac (and probably would prefer it.)

You've got one of the most popular IT companies in the world using one of the most popular operating systems in the world. It's going to get attacked. It's actually a good security measure to diversify the machines in a company. If a virus got in that affected Windows, and everyone was on a Windows machine, it could spread. If only some are on a Windows machine, the damage is minimized.

In the end though, the most successful attacks are socially engineered, meaning it's the people at the company that pose the biggest threat. If you called everyone in a company directory and said you were from IT and needed their login credentials, chances are high someone who doesn't know better will give it to you. No software can prevent this.

Need to test on windows machines. Google apps are always bigger and better on windows than mac (if they release the mac version at all). That means a great many employees (especially developers) of google will need windows machines. This rumor does not pass the smell test.

ok, you clarified "rumor" and I appreciate that. Can you now clarify "bigger and better?"

/Because I have a number of apps like Sketchup and such on both my PC and mac, and wherever possible, I use the mac versions, because they run smoother and look sharper.

In the end though, the most successful attacks are socially engineered, meaning it's the people at the company that pose the biggest threat. If you called everyone in a company directory and said you were from IT and needed their login credentials, chances are high someone who doesn't know better will give it to you. No software can prevent this.

Yeah, I don't see the typical company being able to move their employees to Linux and still expect them to be adequately secured. At this point, Google seems to be in an unique position.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

Now google docs? I remember loging into google all they time with my mac and note saying not compatible with mac safari yet. Now I agree it is, but it was out for windows in 2005. I believe (not sure) that it started working on the mac in early 2009.

Google earth, a few years ago i needed to make a video of a google earth segment. I had to do this on windows google earth because feature was not available on mac. I really can go on.

Article states:
"New hires at Google are given the choice of running a Mac, or a system running Linux."

What am i not comprehending?

If you think that a software developer who is responsible for developing software and making sure it runs on Windows wouldn't be assigned a Windows box as well (or at least a dual booted partition/bootcamp/parallels) then you are sorely mistaken. Phasing out of the general company, getting rid of it where possible. If you need to make sure your software is working on Windows for dev and testing purposes, then that is part where it can't and won't get phased out. I'm not sure what's so difficult about this concept.

Girls, girls. I am sorry to interrupt your little tea party. Please be respectful of each other. Goog is probably concerned SOMEWHAT with Windows appearances. But does every employee ensure Windows compatibility, no. Most likely that has nothing to do with >90% of the headcount's tasking. Sure, a few people will need to run Windows... arguably. Or, it could be replicated in some other way. The main point is, major enterprise may start to break away from Windows. Most companies lack the confidence (and CIO competence) to strike out on their own launching a Mac centric (or even Ubuntu centric) workstation template. But, Google does have that confidence and they have reasons to make a point of doing it.

The fact that there will be some Windows tester units (most likely off-grid and used for testing alone) is not really here nor there. Goog is moving their business off Windows. That, and Apple, makes two.

If you think that a software developer who is responsible for developing software and making sure it runs on Windows wouldn't be assigned a Windows box as well (or at least a dual booted partition/bootcamp/parallels) then you are sorely mistaken. Phasing out of the general company, getting rid of it where possible. If you need to make sure your software is working on Windows for dev and testing purposes, then that is part where it can't and won't get phased out. I'm not sure what's so difficult about this concept.

Right. The China attack was done through email. Everyone would be wise not to use Windows for email. Google is probably trying to move the general purpose office computing off the Windows platform.

No one familiar with programming would assume that Ph.D. computer scientist is stupid enough to click on a suspicious email link. Of course they can have whatever computer they need to get their assignments done. People are taking this 'phase out' thing to literally.

If you think that a software developer who is responsible for developing software and making sure it runs on Windows wouldn't be assigned a Windows box as well (or at least a dual booted partition/bootcamp/parallels) then you are sorely mistaken. Phasing out of the general company, getting rid of it where possible. If you need to make sure your software is working on Windows for dev and testing purposes, then that is part where it can't and won't get phased out. I'm not sure what's so difficult about this concept.

The article does not state that they are phasing out of the general company and getting rid of it where possible. The article states they are phasing out the operating system. it also states new employees just hired do not have the option of choosing windows operating systems. I'm telling you that i think that is bull.

As I read this on every other blog in the universe yesterday I couldn't help wondering if Google might make developing and supporting the Windows platform take a back seat now. I'd love to see PC marginalization web sites start up soon.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

The fact that there will be some Windows tester units (most likely off-grid and used for testing alone) is not really here nor there. Goog is moving their business off Windows. That, and Apple, makes two.

Right. The China attack was done through email. Everyone would be wise not to use Windows for email. Google is probably trying to move the general purpose office computing off the Windows platform.

No one familiar with programming would assume that Ph.D. computer scientist is stupid enough to click on a suspicious email link. Of course they can have whatever computer they need to get their assignments done. People are taking this 'phase out' thing to literally.

I take the 'phase out thing' as another major sign of the continuing demise of Windows as an OS and Microsoft as a whole.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

I take the 'phase out thing' as another major sign of the continuing demise of Windows as an OS and Microsoft as a whole.

You are preaching to the choir. However as we all know 90% of the users out there are completely clueless about computers. The tech savvy users may be moving away from Windows ever so slowly, but for the general population, it will take at least 3-5 more upgrade cycles before Apple will even make a noticeable dent considering the enormity of the Windows install base..

What they are putting the closed system, big brother apple on their desktops in google, and then bashing the living daylights out of apple in public? Who would have thought they were the biggest hypocrites on the globe...

Quote:

Originally Posted by AIaddict

Can you guys read?

Google is NOT switching everyone to Macs running OSX. They have always had an option of which OS to use, and they are now dropping the Windows option. Employees now will have the choice of OSX, LINUX, or ChromeOS. I would also bet Windows developers will haver permission to run Windowes machines. No half qualified CIO is stupid enough to deny that when there is a legitimate case that outweighs the risks. I would not count on OSX becoming the dominant platform in Google. I am sure Chrome and Android will have a good chunk of the internal marketshare, if for no other reason, it would be a politicaaly smart choice for emplyees to make.

Android is not a desktop OS and Chrome is not even out, how are these options to develop on, a mobile os, and an os that's not even stable for release yet? It seems you are the one who can't read.

Isn't a copy of Windows running in Parallels pretty much protected by OSX? Or is it?

No, it's sandboxed in Parallels. If the hacker figures out you are running Parallels, and there are flaws in Parallels, they could essentially hack into your OSX box too. Not saying it's been done, and I'm not saying there are flaws in Parallels, but theoretically it's a link to explore/exploit. Same goes for VMware. It's a hypervisor, and if you can hack it, you could have control over the hosts in it. ESX may be more secure than the desktop version (like Fusion), but not immune to bugs and hacks.

The move created mild discontent among some Google employees, appreciative of the choice in operating systems granted to them - an unusual feature in large companies. But many employees were relieved they could still use Macs and Linux. It would have made more people upset if they banned Macs rather than Windows, he added.

Umm that would be called BIAS. Anything they can do to make Microsoft bad and Apple good would par for the course here.

The move created mild discontent among some Google employees, appreciative of the choice in operating systems granted to them - an unusual feature in large companies. But many employees were relieved they could still use Macs and Linux. It would have made more people upset if they banned Macs rather than Windows, he added.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orlando

Whilst Google does develop some desktop applications the vast majority of their stuff is web based. They are not Windows centric.

If you look at the videos Google releases, often they are demoing on Macs.

BS. Windows gets the consumer Google apps first. Even when there are Mac versions they tend to lack all of the features. Picassa took forever to come out on the Mac. Chrome was lagging behind as well. Today Chrome on the Mac still does NOT support Kerberose. Mac users that want to get through the proxy at work must use FireFox (also lagging behind the Windows version) since Safari does not support Kerberose either. However Chrome on Windows has full Kerberose support.

The article does not state that they are phasing out of the general company and getting rid of it where possible. The article states they are phasing out the operating system. it also states new employees just hired do not have the option of choosing windows operating systems. I'm telling you that i think that is bull.

The whole story is missing lots of FACTS. New employees can get Windows if they get permission.

This is not a win for Mac or Apple. Google employees will end up on Linux in the end or Google's version of it. They will have lots of test Windows boxes running in Virtual Box, and less Apple test boxes.

The real story is how the EFF did they get hit?? Running Windows XP with IE6 is flat out stupid. They are both 10 years old. I bet they were missing patches, I bet those users were full Admins on those boxes. The story is Google's IT security or LACK OF IT. So instead of firing the moron that let this happen they blame it on Microsoft? I wonder if they were running Vista or 7 with IE8 fully patched if this would have happened? Doubtful, very doubtful.

What they are putting the closed system, big brother apple on their desktops in google, and then bashing the living daylights out of apple in public? Who would have thought they were the biggest hypocrites on the globe...

Android is not a desktop OS and Chrome is not even out, how are these options to develop on, a mobile os, and an os that's not even stable for release yet? It seems you are the one who can't read.

Right and you work for Google and know the status of Chrome? At Google the Chrome OS is beta, and it will be that way for 6 years.

Its reasonable to believe that some people at Google run it daily in its current form.

The real story is how the EFF did they get hit?? Running Windows XP with IE6 is flat out stupid. They are both 10 years old. I bet they were missing patches, I bet those users were full Admins on those boxes. The story is Google's IT security or LACK OF IT. So instead of firing the moron that let this happen they blame it on Microsoft? I wonder if they were running Vista or 7 with IE8 fully patched if this would have happened? Doubtful, very doubtful.

It of course makes for good blog headlines at Appleinsider.

I have many industrial clients still running xp with ie6. I tell them to keep it up because I charge quite a few extra hours of programming css to work on that old ie6 crap.

I agree, this is why i posted that I do not believe the premise of this story. Google will not shoot itself in the foot. Their web apps will be targeted Windows IE primarily and other browser secondarily ... at least until IE marketshare reduces to a point where it is no longer relevant to support it primarily. That will happen sooner than microsoft thinks.

BS. Windows gets the consumer Google apps first. Even when there are Mac versions they tend to lack all of the features. Picassa took forever to come out on the Mac. Chrome was lagging behind as well. Today Chrome on the Mac still does NOT support Kerberose. Mac users that want to get through the proxy at work must use FireFox (also lagging behind the Windows version) since Safari does not support Kerberose either. However Chrome on Windows has full Kerberose support.

Google is not stupid, Windows still has 91% of the desktop market.

Uh Safari supports kerberos just fine. Many Apple apps can use kerberos. Addressbook, iCal, iChat, Finder, VPN, and Safari all can use kerberos for authentication. You might want to re-investigate Safari.

I have many industrial clients still running xp with ie6. I tell them to keep it up because I charge quite a few extra hours of programming css to work on that old ie6 crap.

I hope you were (but fear you weren't) being sarcastic.
I wouldn't want you advising or providing services for my business as you're not doing what's in its best interest. You should at least inform your clients about the security benefits of upgrading from IE6.

There's an opinion expressed before that IT departments and IT technicians tend to do what's in their best interest, i.e. favour tech solutions they understand or have qualifications for rather than what's in their organisation's or client's best interest, i.e. more reliable tech or software which may require new effort from IT techs to understand and embrace.

I find your reaction to this story of Google throwing out Windows rather telling.

California State Highway patrol officers caught several Google employees throwing their cellphones into the Pacific Ocean. When accosted by the officers, the men and women of Google sheepishly admitted that they hated their phones that were powered by Android.

"All the Android Apps are so lame," said one young man who refused to give his name. Another young woman, who was visibly upset, said, "It is so hard to upgrade the OS on my phone. Why can't Eric just let us use the iPhone? It is so cool. My boyfriend has it. Thank God, he does not work for Google."

The officers warned the Googlers that polluting the Pacific Ocean with Android phones was a crime worse than causing an oil spill. If convicted, a person could be sentenced to life imprisonment. Without any hope of parole.

LOL !!

Heh. Thanks for the laugh.
Maybe they could plug the oil leak with Android phones? A win-win scenario?

Uh Safari supports kerberos just fine. Many Apple apps can use kerberos. Addressbook, iCal, iChat, Finder, VPN, and Safari all can use kerberos for authentication. You might want to re-investigate Safari.